1325 new virus deaths, how did this happen?

[oldhippydude]

It's not misleading at all to illustrate that this isn't only a problem for the old and sick. Maybe someone should tell that to the NHS staff dealing with it or all non-covid patients unable to get their scheduled treatments. Whether they're 18 or 64 is wholly irrelevant to the point I was making. So your point is irrelevant to mine which is accurately laid bare in the quote I posted with accompanying article link.

It must just be me struggling to understand your point. Put it down to age.
If you are happy that your point has been made, then me not understating is neither here nor there.

 

[Mitz]

It must just be me struggling to understand your point. Put it down to age.
If you are happy that your point has been made, then me not understating is neither here nor there.

My point is increbily simple mate. The idea that this is only the problem of the very old and very sick is BS. That's literally it.

 

[oldhippydude]

My point is increbily simple mate. The idea that this is only the problem of the very old and very sick is horse shit. That's literally it.

Oh. Perhaps I am not so stupid. That is what I thought you point was.
It is obviously not only a problem for the very old or very sick.
It is just the case that the older and or sicker you are the bigger the problem.

I still think my quote puts the risk in context better than your chosen quote.
I have reached my limit on going round in circles on this point.
I am happy to leave it to others to decide if either of us has a point worth making.

 

[Mitz]

Oh. Perhaps I am not so stupid. That is what I thought you point was.
It is obviously not only a problem for the very old or very sick.
It is just the case that the older and or sicker you are the bigger the problem.

I still think my quote puts the risk in context better than your chosen quote.
I have reached my limit on going round in circles on this point.
I am happy to leave it to others to decide if either of us has a point worth making.

I don't think you'll find anyone who'll disagree with that so I really don't know what your issue was to begin with. The point I was making is disputed by some. Hence why I made it. As I said, what you were highlighting was irrelevant to the point I was making. I already accepted in my previous post that I should have been specific and quoted exactly what I was addressing.

Anyways.

I think by now everyone knows the points we're both making.

 

[Simon G]

Footfall on TFL (Transport for London) has been double the numbers this lockdown, than it was in the first lockdown last year.

 

[Mitz]

Footfall on TFL (Transport for London) has been double the numbers this lockdown, than it was in the first lockdown last year.

Any idea what that looks like in numbers?

 

[Mr Ripple]

Worth mentioning the boundaries of "key workers" have been stretched this time round too meaning less people locked down this time.

 

[Simon G]

Any idea what that looks like in numbers?

No sorry... mentioned here. You can probably find it somewhere in the links, as he does reference everything.

 

[Mr Ripple]

Professor Robert West, a participant in the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviours (SPI-B), said the current restrictions are “still allowing a lot of activity which is spreading the virus”.
He told the BBC: “Because we have the more infectious variant, which is somewhere around 5 per cent more infectious than last time round in March, that means that if we were to achieve the same result as we got in March we would have to have a stricter lockdown, and it’s not stricter. It’s actually less strict."

 

[mick brown]

Also, some work place's are now supposedly covid safe (whatever that means) so can remain open which they didn't last March so that means more folk's about.